Two Extremes: The Single vs. The Married

Not open for further replies.


Puritan Board Sophomore
Women tend to compete with their friends. If there friends get a certain gift lavished upon them, they are more inclined to want it for themselves.

These are issues that have become a conflict of interest for married men to discuss, especially with the boss.

You've introduced two rather foolish stereotypes when you posted this.

1) Women are no more susceptible to coveting than men are. The tenth commandment is aimed at the heart and mind of everyone.

2) In a godly marriage the wife is not the "boss". While there is mutual submission in a marriage, the husband is the head.

Moreover...what on earth does this have to do with your OP?


Puritan Board Post-Graduate
My dad has a small herd of cattle. I’ve noticed the heifers working together to put down another cow.
Because we all know women are just like heifers. Is this red pill stuff?

I still haven't a clue of where you are going or why. Your thoughts are disjointed.


To answer the question you raised: there are good, godly, single pastors in both the PCA and the OPC (and doubtless in every single NAPARC denomination). And there is absolutely nothing in either Scripture, the Reformed Confessions, or the relevant Books of Church Order which would require any man to be married in order to be a minister (although there are good biblical, practical, and historical reasons why most ministers are married).

I'm only repeated what others have already said though, so if this really was the core of your question then it seems that the matter is closed and your question has been answered.

However, it certainly seems like you're driving at something else. It seems like you're suggesting that married men are somehow unable to properly apply and preach passages on marriage and relationships because they are married (and you also seem to be suggesting that it is because married men are afraid of their wives). Is that at all what you're driving at? Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding, but I find myself agree with others that I'm struggling to get at your point.


Ordinary Guy (TM)

Do you (1) feel called to be single? Or (2) have you been burned by Western women (who, yes, are mostly infected by feminism to some degree...even in most churches) and have you chosen to go the MGTOW route? It seems there is some frustration in your post.

Regarding single pastors, there are few who are called to it. I know 1 or 2 men who are called to singleness, but they appear slightly strange, to be honest. The normal state of mankind is to be married.

The Apostle Paul does say there are strengths to staying single, yes.

And yes, there is competition among women. It shapes how they dress, makeup, etc. There is also competition among men. Many people are blind to this and not willing to accept it and introducing it into your conversation will just make people focus and fight against that and not your main points, though.

NO...the admonition from Paul about being a husband of one wife is NOT about polygamy. It means that IF a man is married then he is to be a one-woman man.

I think pastors who are called to singleness should look into the possibility of serving in a hard area. Many do not serve in some Muslim contexts or harsh areas of the world because they must also care for a wife and children, who are constitutionally and emotionally weaker. Therefore, if you are called to singleness, maybe work among the Kurds and Yazidis, or among a jungle tribe, or in Siberia, or some place where your independence and mobility and health can be used for the glory of God.


Puritan Board Freshman
I find it interesting that if a man is a single pastor...that at least he won’t be one of those controlled by his wife.


Puritan Board Sophomore
The normal state of mankind is to be married.
Calvin says the same thing in the Institutes (

If he has not the power of subduing his passion, let him understand that the Lord has made it obligatory on him to marry. The Apostle shows this when he enjoins: “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife and let every woman have her own husband.” “If they cannot contain, let them marry.” He first intimates that the greater part of men are liable to incontinence; and then of those so liable, he orders all, without exception, to have recourse to the only remedy by which unchastity may be obviated. The incontinent, therefore, neglecting to cure their infirmity by this means, sin by the very circumstance of disobeying the Apostle’s command. And let not a man flatter himself, that because he abstains from the outward act he cannot be accused of unchastity. His mind may in the meantime be inwardly inflamed with lust. For Paul’s definition of chastity is purity of mind, combined with purity of body. “The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit,” (1 Cor. 7:34). Therefore when he gives a reason for the former precept, he not only says that it is better to marry than to live in fornication, but that it is better to marry than to burn.


Puritan Board Freshman
Yep. And maybe men like me are the anomaly? Look at the “if” statement.
I’m not, however, seeking the pulpit at this time. It’s not in my plans.

Also, we don’t always hold to everything that Calvin held to...

Shouldn’t women cover their heads when conducting the public reading of the scriptures?

There are many other issues that Calvin held to that aren’t what we hold to at large.
Last edited:
Not open for further replies.